Apple and Prepear Negotiating a Settlement Over Disputed Pear Logo Trademark

nwcs said:
Apple has an obligation to defend their trademarks and servicemarks even in questionable cases or risk losing their protections. I don’t think they care if they lose, really, but they certainly need to ensure people are careful with coming close to their marks.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it's an obligation. Afaik, It's a myth that you have to defend a copyright or risk losing it... but a trademark might be different?

That would make sense. If too many logos are created that look too similar then eventually there isn't enough uniqueness to set it apart, making it generic and something that can't hold a trademark. Therefore you must defend against logos that are too similar.
 
Last edited:
Remember, this isn't a lawsuit -- it's contesting the trademark application with the USPTO. If they're denied a trademark by the USPTO, it doesn't mean they can't use it or owe Apple anything. They just wouldn't have the benefits that come with a national registration.

I think Apple is out of bounds even contesting it, but the downside for the pear isn't great.
 
ccraig13 said:
This is probably one of those situations where they have to fight it in order to prevent future issues with logos that push the envelope even further.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same. Even though this is a small business other orgs will try the same and say "well if you let Pear get away with their logo then why not us as well."
 
The obvious solution is for Apple to slant their stem the other way. No more massive case of consumer confusion!
 
Likely there's an employee at apl whose only job is to investigate copyright infringement. Maybe there's lots of them. Since they've got such an iffy job, it makes sense that they brought this issue to the courts to try to justify their salaries
 
I can't see how Apple can argue infringing similarity here but it never ceases to amaze me how lawyers can successfully argue the impossible. I have a feeling this is one of those times where Apple started something they now regret but have to follow through on. I'm guessing there will be an undisclosed settlement where Prepear gets to keep the logo.
 
Graphikos said:
I'm not sure it's an obligation. Afaik, It's a myth that you have to defend a copyright or risk losing it... but a trademark might be different?
Click to expand...
Trademarks need to be defended to keep the mark from becoming generic. The goal of trademarks is to identify the source of an item or good. If other businesses use a mark to identify their good or service, then it no longer identifies the true source and the mark isn't defensible.

The seminal example is Kleenex generically used as tissue, not to identify the Kleenex brand. Or "jet ski" doesn't identify a Kawasaki product but a class of small boats made by many.
 
It looks nothing like the Apple logo. Apple's legal department needs some applied corona. I still remember when Apple was sued by Apple Records for the exact same thing. Apple agreed, as part of the settlement, to never, ever, get into the music industry. Then came the sosumi beep sound and the rest his history.
 
Realityck said:
Just imagine some farmer suing other fruit tree farmers, that the shape of their fruits looks too much like his Apples?

Did Apple go after orange investments? There are others. Do any of the following create a similar commercial impression?


t_Orange-Investments_8.png

h_orange-county-convention-center-logo_17.png
Click to expand...
Oranges are a citrus fruit so....
 
Maybe Apple will go after Banana.com next. Their "b" contains a very similar shape to another piece of fruit and also is pointing slightly to the right. Will Apple go after all fruit named companies? lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top